“My colleagues might think it’s OK that the Russians offered
dirt on the Democratic candidate for president as part of what’s described as
the Russian government’s effort to help the Trump campaign. You might think
that’s OK.
“My colleagues might think it’s OK that when that was
offered to the son of the president, who had a pivotal role in the campaign,
that the president’s son did not call the FBI; he did not adamantly refuse that
foreign help – no, instead that son said that he would ‘love’ the help with the
Russians.
“You might think it’s OK that he took that meeting. You
might think it’s OK that Paul Manafort, the campaign chair, someone with great
experience running campaigns, also took that meeting. You might think it’s OK
that the president’s son-in-law also took that meeting. You might think it’s OK
that they concealed it from the public. You might think it’s OK that their only
disappointment after that meeting was that the dirt they received on Hillary
Clinton wasn’t better. You might think that’s OK.
“You might think it’s OK that when it was discovered, a year
later, that they then lied about that meeting and said that it was about
adoptions. You might think that it’s OK that it was reported that the president
helped dictate that lie. You might think that’s OK. I don’t.
“You might think it’s OK that the campaign chairman of a
presidential campaign would offer information about that campaign to a Russian
oligarch in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. You might think that’s OK,
I don’t.
“You might think it’s OK that that campaign chairman offered
polling data to someone linked to Russian intelligence. I don’t think that’s
OK.
“You might think it’s OK that the president himself called
on Russia to hack his opponent’s emails, if they were listening. You might
think it’s OK that later that day, in fact, the Russians attempted to hack a
server affiliated with that campaign. I don’t think that’s OK.
“You might think it’s OK that the president’s son-in-law
sought to establish a secret back channel of communication with the Russians
through a Russian diplomatic facility. I don’t think that’s OK.
“You might think it’s OK that an associate of the president
made direct contact with the GRU through Guccifer 2.0 and WikiLeaks, that is
considered a hostile intelligence agency. You might think it’s OK that a senior
campaign official was instructed to reach that associate and find out what that
hostile intelligence agency had to say in terms of dirt on his opponent.
“You might think it’s OK that the national security adviser
designate secretly conferred with the Russian ambassador about undermining U.S.
sanctions, and you might think it’s OK that he lied about it to the FBI.
“You might say that’s all OK, that’s just what you need to
do to win. But I don’t think it’s OK. I don’t think it’s OK. I think it’s
immoral, I think it’s unethical, I think it’s unpatriotic and, yes, I think
it’s corrupt – and evidence of collusion.”
“Now I have always said that the question of whether this
amounts to proof of conspiracy was another matter. Whether the special counsel
could prove beyond a reasonable doubt the proof of that crime would be up to
the special counsel, and I would accept his decision, and I do. He’s a good and
honorable man, and he is a good prosecutor.
“But I do not think that conduct, criminal or not, is OK.
And the day we do think that’s OK is the day we will look back and say that is
the day that America lost its way.”
“And I will tell you one more thing that is apropos of the
hearing today: I don’t think it’s OK that during a presidential campaign Mr.
Trump sought the Kremlin’s help to consummate a real estate deal in Moscow that
would make him a fortune – according to the special counsel, hundreds of
millions of dollars. I don’t think it’s OK to conceal it from the public. I
don’t think it’s OK that he advocated a new and more favorable policy towards
the Russians even as he was seeking the Russians’ help, the Kremlin’s help to
make money. I don’t think it’s OK that his attorney lied to our committee.
There is a different word for that than collusion, and it’s called
‘compromise.’
“And that is the subject of our hearing today.”
And one of those quislings is my own rep. Rep. Stefanik. We are so proud of her.
No comments:
Post a Comment